ened on the intellectual and moral nature, and let us therefore regard the work of defending Christianity against the attacks of Unbelievers as a work, not of war, but of love.

2. That, while it is unjust and unwise to denounce in general terms the doctrines of any Christian sect as corrupt and productive of Infidelity; and that, as we find, in the corruptions of Christianity and in its irrational application to the souls of men, fundamental causes of unbelief, let us expend our most anxious efforts for their removal.

3. That the advocates of Unitarianism have not yet made such wise application of their principles to the souls of men as to reveal to the world the intrinsic excellence of their faith.

4. That personal communion in the true spirit of Christian kindness between the mind of the Believer and the mind of the Infidel is the great means of removing the Infidelity which already exists. C. A. BARTOL.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE UNITARIAN.

DEAR SIR,

THE following Essay written in the year 1734, by the late Robert Robinson of Cambridge, England (a writer but little known in this country I believe), is so much in accordance with the spirit, design, and tendency of the Unitarian, that your readers, I presume, can scarcely fail to be pleased and profited by the perusal. Through the whole of his laborious and useful life, amidst good report and evil report, he was the staunch, unflinching friend, the fearless and uncompromising advocate of constitutional freedom, civil and religious. Liberality in religion, is, even now, but little understood and practised. On this subject, therefore, we need "line upon line, and precept upon precept." It cannot be too often brought before us, it cannot be too deeply impressed on our minds. M. HARDING.

An Essay on Liberality of Sentiment.

Books, like men, have a temper, and books of this kind should be good tempered; they then conciliate esteem, and like a well-bred man, give no offence; perhaps always com

VOL. I.

40

municate pleasure. It was said of Queen Mary, that she was a good tempered lady of an ill tempered religion. Pity anyone should discover sour, morose tempers, who profess a religion all founded and finished in love; I wish, for the sake of justice as well as general utility, this publication may always exemplify liberality of sentiment.*

By sentiment I mean opinion, and particularly religious opinion; the notion, idea, or judgment we form of the body of religion in the whole, or any of the parts that compose it. By liberality I mean generosity, which, strictly speaking, rather accompanies sentiment than goes into the nature and essence of it. It would be speaking more accurately to say, such a man is a person whose religious sentiments are accompanied with a liberality and generosity of heart towards others, who do not adopt his sentiments, than to say in a vague manner, such a person is of liberal sentiments. This is too general, and I will explain myself.

A man of liberal sentiments must be distinguished from him, who hath no religious sentiments at all. Nothing is more common than to meet with people, who have never turned their attention to religion. Whether it be owing to the natural littleness of the mind, or to the neglect of education, or to the gratifying of our passions, to the company we keep, the occupation we follow, or the vain prospects of future enjoyments in life, or to any other cause, the fact is too well established. The Archbishop of Cambray somewhere resembles such a person to a man in distress for money, who would go into a room, receive, and reckon, and enjoy a large sum, without being able to tell, after he came out, any thing about the dimensions or the decorations of the room. The money, the money, the object of all his hopes and fears, had filled all the capacity of his little soul, so many men enter into the world and quit it. Let them rather blush for not being able to tell whether there be a God, or whether he have spoken, or what he hath said to mankind.

The man I mean to commend, is the man of sentiment. He hath seriously and effectually investigated, both in his Bible and on his knees, in public assemblies, and in private conversations, the important articles of religion. He hath laid down principles, he hath inferred consequences; in a word, he hath adopted sentiments of his own. Nor let us

This Essay was published in the first number of the Theological Magazine, an old work and long out of print.

confound the man of liberal sentiments, with that tame, undiscerning domestic among good people, who, though he has sentiments of his own, yet has not judgment to estimate the worth and value of one sentiment beyond another. Two truths equally clear, may not be of equal dignity and importance. Can the posture in which I address God, suppose it scriptural, be as important as the temper in which I pray to him? People of this class divide into two parts, the one have no essentials, and the other no circumstantials in religion. The man who would conceal this ignorance and indifference under pretence of liberality of sentiment, resembles Solomon's idiot, and says "one event happeneth to the clean and to the unclean; as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath." Out of the hive of those, who have no circumstantials, the objects of toleration in religion, come a third class, who indeed have sentiments, and just sentiments, but who hold them in the unrighteous dispositions of censure, slander, and persecutions. Morose and fierce as a stormy winter day, their aspect lours, and all their efforts damage the humble traveller, whose rusty cloak seems to him a nobler gift of God than all the mighty powers that endanger his comfort and his life. A generous soul will not only abstain from injuring the innocent, plundering the widow, and pillaging the orphan, but, to use a fine expression of a prophet, he will despise the gain of oppression, shake his hands from holding of bribes, stop his ears from hearing of blood, and shut his eyes from seeing evil. What can a fierce believer reply to a modest Christian uttering such a soliloquy as this? You have a fine genius; but you persecute me! You are sound in the faith; but your faith or your something works hatred to me! You are an eloquent orator; but you slander me! You sing with harmony, and pray with energy; but you increase your felicity by crucifying me. Think seriously, would the King of kings, your Lord and mine, pattern of every good work; would he treat me thus? And would you wish he should conduct himself to you, as you do to me? The man of liberal sentiments, is supposed to be of the sentiments of Jesus Christ, and in Jesus Christ there are two admirable perfections, the one extensive power, the other the kindest and most gentle use of it.

We should extend this subject to an improper length, were we to describe the exercise of liberality of sentiment, and enforce it by arguments. A sketch, then shall serve.

A generous believer of the Christian religion, in whole or

in part, will never allow himself to try to propagate his sentiments by the commission of sin. No collusion, no bitterness, no wrath, no undue influence of any kind, will he apply to make his sentiments receivable; no living thing will be less happy for his being a Christian; he will exercise his liberality by allowing those who differ from him as much virtue and integrity as he possibly can. He will say, have I read the Scriptures? so have they. Have I set God always before me? so have they. Do I act up to my best light? so do they. Are they fallible? so am I. Have they prejudices and passions? so have I. Have we both one master and are we fellow servants; and must we all give an account to the Judge of the world of the deeds done in the body? The wisest and the best way then is, to render the present life happy by agreeing where we can, and, where we cannot, by agreeing to differ.

There are, among a multitude of arguments to enforce such a disposition, the following worth our attention.

I. We should exercise liberality in union with sentiments because of the different capacities, advantages, and tasks of mankind. Religion employs the capacities of mankind, just as the air employs their lungs and their organs of speech. The fancy of one is lively, of another dull. The judgment of one is elastic, of another feeble, a damaged spring. The memory of one is retentive; that of another treacherous, as the wind. The passions of this man are lofty, vigorous rapid; those of that man cruel, and hum and buz, and when on the wing, sail only round the circumference of a tulip. Is it conceivable that capability so different in every thing else, should be all alike in religion? The advantages of mankind differ. How should he who hath no parents, no books, no tutor, no companions, equal him whom Providence hath gratified with them all? Who, when he looks over the treasures of his own knowledge, can say, this I had of a Greek, that I learned of a Roman, this information I acquired of my tutor, that was a present of my father; a friend gave me this branch of knowledge, an acquaintance bequeathed me that. The tasks of mankind differ, so I call the employments and exercises of life. In my opinion circumstances make great men and if we have not Cæsars in the state, and Pauls in the church, it is because neither church nor state are in the circumstances in which they were in the days of those great men. Push a dull man into a river, and endanger his life, and suddenly he will discover invention, and make efforts beyond himself. The world is a fine school of instruction. Poverty,

sickness, pain, loss of children, treachery of friends, malice of enemies, and a thousand other things drive the man of sentiments to his Bible, and, so to speak, bring him home to a repast with his benefactor, God. Is it conceivable that he, whose young and tender heart is yet all unpractised in trials of this kind, can have ascertained and tasted so many religious truths as the sufferer has?

II. We should exercise liberality along with our sentiments, because of the depravities as well as imperfections of mankind. The patrons of error and vice have known mankind too well to hazard the cause of sin undisguised, and in its native form. Is there a crime without an apologist, or one disgraceful action without a specious name? Is immorality any thing more than fashion? Is not deism genius, and blasphemy spirit and courage? O the godly pretences of error, the plausible pretexts of sin! How should a youth born in the lap of error, nourished and cherished with her milk, surrounded with people all in error like himself, where everything is in disguise, how should he, if his heart be depraved, how should he resist magic so full of charms! Depraved mankind! instead of persecuting you for embracing only five out of five thousand truths of religion, I will pity and esteem you, and adore the grace that emboldens you to admit the five; "you may be saved, yet so as by fire." Had I, depraved like you, perhaps more than you, had I been so powerfully attacked by error, I might not have been saved at all.

We should believe the Christian religion with liberality, in the third place, because, every part of the Christian religion inculcates generosity. Christianity gives us a character of God! what a character does it give, God is love; Christianity teaches the doctrine of providence; but what a providence! Upon whom doth not its light arise! Is there an animalcule so little, or a wretch so forlorn, as to be forsaken and forgotten of his God? Christianity teaches the doctrine of redemption; but the redemption of whom? Of all tongues, kindred, nations, and people; of the infant of a span, and the sinner of a hundred years old: a redemption generous in its principle, generous in its price, generous in its effects, fixed sentiments of divine munificence, and revealed with a liberality, for which we have no name. In a word, the illib eral Christian always acts contrary to the spirit of his religion; the liberal man alone thoroughly understands it.

IV. We should be liberal, because no other spirit is exem plified in the infallible guides, whom we profess to follow, I